E 175 



:>. 7.- : ; : . vj-.j 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



DDDD175S01fl 




£_lZ<a. 



Class 

Book ^_a5r_ 



GDgTightN" 



COrXRIGliT DEPOSm 




E 176 



Class 

Book. ^^a5r_ 



CoppglitN^ 



COPXRIGlfT DEPOSm 



ff 



In the Jj^ves of some Qreat Americans 



ff 



OR 



MAKING GOOD THE DECLARATION 
OF INDEPENDENCE 



L. W. Baxter 



itfx 



In the Lives of some Great Americans 



OR 



Making Good the Declaration 
of Independence 



By LAURENCE W. ^AXTER 



\; ^ 



of the Philadelphia Bar 



Philadelphia: 
INNES & SONS 

I29-IJ5 N. Twelfth St. 
1922 



EI/76 
.Bss 



Copyright, 1922, by L. W. BAXTER 



JAN --5 '23 

C1A605061 



Sto tttQ Wife mh (Eljtl&rett 

THIS LITTLE BOOK IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED 
BY THE AUTHOR 



Jtttruiurtwtt 

"Psychological Moments^^ is a pure 
labor of love. It is the product of some 
odd moments agreeably employed in the 
pursuit of happiness and mental diversion 
while passing a vacation at the farm, 
amid the joys of summer and the multiple 
beauties of nature, all contributing to a 
state of mind in harmony with the 
thoughts and purpose of the writer. 

The phrase "psychological moment," it 
will be observed, has been used at times 
as the exact equivalent of "spiritual 
vision," and the writer claims no in- 
fallible judgment in the technically cor- 
rect use of either. They are employed 
simply as the best or the most appro- 
priate phrases to describe or to account 
for those exceptionally brilliant acts or 
deeds in the lives of some great Ameri- 
cans, as set forth in the following pages, 
and the writer trusts that they will be so 
accepted and understood by the reader. 



8 Great Americans 

The writer had long entertained the 
idea that a work of this kind, if kept 
within proper limits and avoiding super- 
fluous detail, might not be unacceptable 
to the general reader, as a sort of artificial 
memory of the greatest, at least of some 
of the greatest, events in American his- 
tory. But the selections of those events 
from the lives of the illustrious dead were 
not always easily made. When a man's 
life is so replete with ennobling and ex- 
ceptional labors, as was Benjamin 
Franklin's for example, to say which was 
the best, the brightest, the most important 
and enduring, the one which might, with- 
out impropriety, be ascribed to some 
"psychological moment," one's judgment 
wavers, and however carefully he tries to 
make a correct decision and does finally 
reach a conclusion, the chances are that 
it will not meet the approval of all. 

What he especially desired to select and 
present was that series of remarkable and 
unparalleled deeds and achievements in 
the lives of certain great Americans who 
stand pre-eminent even among those to 



Introduction 9 

whom history has awarded the title 
"Illustrious." He wished to connect them 
in a way so as to form, as far as possible, 
a sort of historical and chronological 
chain of events, showing, at a glance, not 
only their influence and effect in the for- 
mation and development of our govern- 
mental policies and purposes from time 
to time, not only in the direction of the 
thought and aspirations of the American 
people, but their legitimate fruitage in 
the spectacle of the United States, the 
greatest and most splendid nation in all 
history, and destined to remain such if — 
yes, if — the political demagogue, mounte- 
bank, or any other nondescript, masque- 
rading under the guise of a reformer, is 
kept where he belongs, and the American 
statesman and patriot of today remains 
true to his country's ideals, and forgets 
not the lessons of the patriot-statesman 
of the past. 

There is a brief discussion of a League 
of Nations which seemed to come within 
the purview of this work as a sort of 
corollary to the proposition discussed by 



10 Great Americans 

Mr. Webster in his celebrated reply to 
Mr. Hayne. 

It is not a large book, but if it in any 
way fulfils the desire expressed in the 
foregoing paragraphs, the undersigned 
will feel that his reward is both abundant 
and complete. 

L. W. Baxter. 

Philadelphia, Novtmbtr 1. 1923 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

/ 

George Washington Frontispiece ^ 

From the bronze bust of Washington in the Hall of the 
Pennsylvania Historical Society at Philadelphia. The 
bust rests on a circular pedestal on which are carved the 



words: 



FIRST IN WAR, 

FIRST IN PEACE, 

AND FIRST IN THE HEARTS 

OF HIS COUNTRYMEN. 



Henry Lee was the author of this famous phrase. It first 
occurs in a set of resolutions he prepared on the death of 
Washington in 1799. He then submitted his resolutions 
to his colleague, John Marshall, for approval; and he, 
after approving them, and at Lee's request, introduced 
them in Congress. From this circumstance Marshall 
himself came to be designated as the author. Marshall, 
however, steadfastly refused to allow history thus to 
designate him, but invariably ascribed their authorship to 
Henry Lee. (For a complete history of the phrase, see 
Life of John Marshall, by Albert J. Beveridge, Vol. H, 
pp. 443-444). 

Daniel Webster 

Engraved by A. B. Walter. From Life of Webster, by 
Gen. S. P. Lyman. John E. Potter & Co., Philadelphia, 
185a. 

Harriet Beecher Stowe 5^ 

A copy of the photogravure of the bust by Miss Durant 
in 1853. This photogravure, marvelously beautiful and 
one of the most perfect, appears as a frontispiece in The 
Life of Harriet Beecher Stowe, by Annie Fields, and 
published by the Houghton, Mifflin Company of Boston, 
Mass. Special permission was kindly granted by that 
Company to take a copy of the photogravure for use in 
this book. 

Abraham Lincoln 68 

Engraved by John Sartain from a photograph from life. 
(From "Life and Times of Abraham Lincoln," by L. 
P. Brockett,M. D. Bradley & Co., Philadelphia, 1865.) 



J 



^ 



"GREAT AMERICANS" 

HEREIN CONSIDERED 

PAGB 

Benjamin Franklin 18 

Thomas Jefferson 21 

John Adams 25 

George Washington 29 

Alexander Hamilton 35 

James Monroe 37 

Daniel Webster 40 

Harriet Beecher Stowe 58 

Elizabeth Cady Stanton 60 

Abraham Lincoln 67 

Henry W. Grady 71 



SUBJECTS 

PAGE 
The Virginia Convention — The Psychological 

Moment of the American People 31 

The Monroe Doctrine — Its Single Violation 

by Napoleon III 38 

Emerson's Conception of Daniel Webster — 

Extracts from His Journal 40 

Webster's Services to the Nation, 44; His 
Reply to Hayne a Proof of the Imprac- 
ticability of a League of Nations 56 

Availability— What is It? The Presidents 

Themselves Its Best Examples 45 

Uncle Tom's Cabin 59 

Woman's Rights 60 

America's Contributions to Civilization — 
United States and Greece Briefly Com- 
pared 64 

Emancipation 68 

Grady's Tribute to Lincoln 69 



IN THE LIVES OF SOME GREAT AMERICANS 

SmptBtxth 

Or, Making Good the Declaration 
of Independence 



IN THE LIVES OF SOME GREAT AMERICANS 

It is the lot of some persons to do the 
big things, and the bigger the deeds the 
more perfect the skill with which they 
are done. They are the ones, who, like 
St. Paul, are never disobedient to the 
spiritual vision when it crosses their 
path, but answer its call with an un- 
wavering faith in its truth, realizing in 
the end an abundant reward. Their ex- 
perience, of course, is out of the ordinary, 
and doubtless accounts for the origin of 
the phrase, "psychological moment," the 
moment which reveals to its possessor 
some exceptionally important work to be 
done, with an exceptional honor and dis- 
tinction when the service is performed. 
They are the people whom history praises ; 
whom the thoughtful student studies; 
whom the statesman endeavors to copy; 
whom the orator takes for his theme; 
whom the general reader finds of sur- 



18 Great Americans 

passing human interest ; and so the world 
is kept green by their extraordinary deeds 
and achievements. 



Among the great Americans in whose 
lives are found conspicuous examples of 
the improvement of "psychological mo- 
ments," stands Benjamin Franklin, 
printer, editor, philosopher, statesman, 
diplomat, patriot! Could versatility be 
more complete? 

In recounting the deeds which crowded 
his useful and eventful life, to which 
would he have given the distinction of 
being the one which he had performed in 
obedience to some spiritual vision or 
psychological moment? Many might say 
his most brilliant deed was when he drew 
lightning from the clouds; that probably 
would be correct. Franklin, however, 
never regarded that achievement as his 
highest distinction. On the contrary, his 
answer doubtless would have been, if 
asked, "Bead my answers to the members 



Benjamin Franklin 19 

of the House of Commons who were 
chosen to examine me on the subject of 
the repeal of the Stamp Act,'' not because 
he achieved on that occasion a tremendous 
personal triumph, but because of the ter- 
rible penalty which the mother country 
paid for her refusal to adopt his sugges- 
tions and the recommendations he gave to 
the British statesmen at the time — the 
loss of her American colonies. That ex- 
amination, with its lessons in g'overn- 
ment, in political economy, in practical 
statesmanship, as revealed in his answers, 
must have afforded him a constant and 
peculiar satisfaction of having rendered 
not only a conspicuous service to his own 
country, but to England as well. Just 
one question and its answer : 

^^Q. You say the Colonies have al- 
ways submitted to external taxes, and 
object to the right of Parliament only 
in laying internal taxes; now can you 
show that there is any kind of differ- 
ence between the two taxes to the 
colony on which they may be laid? 



20 Great Americans 

"A. I think the difference is very 
great. An external tax is a duty laid 
on commodities imported; that duty is 
added to the first cost and other charges 
of the commodity, and when it is offered 
for sale, makes a part of the price. If 
the people do not like it at that price, 
they refuse it; they are not obliged to 
pay it. But an internal tax is forced 
from the people without their consent 
if not laid by their own representatives. 
The Stamp Act says we shall have no 
commerce, make no exchange of prop- 
erty with each other, neither purchase 
nor grant, nor recover debts; we shall 
neither marry nor make our wills, 
unless we pay such and such sums ; and 
that it is intended to extort our money 
from us or ruin us by the consequence 
of refusing to pay it.'' 

Franklin's life was crowded with bril 
liant deeds ; but the most important of all, 
it would seem, the one lacking nothing 
for its completeness, the one that gave 
him a distinctive place in the sun, was 



Thomas Jefferson 21 

his examination bj the Committee in the 
House of Commons relative to the repeal 
of the Stamp Act. 

But now another work was to be done, 
requiring an equally high, if not the high- 
est order of talent. Who was to do it? 



When Thomas Jefferson wrote the 
Declaration of American Independence, 
the crisis in the affairs of the colonists 
imperatively demanded a document of 
just such a character and style. Any 
less forcible statement of the grievances 
and wrongs impelling America to a sepa- 
ration from the mother country, or 
enumerated by a less capable pen, would 
doubtless have failed of its purpose and 
fallen flat upon the country. The work, 
if done well, would constitute an epoch 
in the evolution and progress of a nation ; 
if not, it might lack the essential inspira- 
tion to heroic deeds and continuous cour- 
age, and would thus imperil, or might 
imperil, not only the life of its author, but 



22 Great Americans 

the lives of all those who were engaged 
with him in the arduous but glorious task 
of achieving liberty without tyranny, and 
the right to rule as freemen should, mak- 
ing their own laws, subject to no others. 
That the work was well done all the 
world admits. That it could have been 
done better, who has ever claimed? It is 
such a tribute to his greatness, that his 
eminence, as a statesman, scholar and 
writer, in the convention which adopted 
it, is acknowledged by all. He drew it 
from out his own intellectual resources, 
it is said. And yet Franklin was there, 
a member of the committee, and at the 
time the most talked-about man in all the 
world; but he does not appear to have 
offered even the slightest suggestion in 
the way of subject-matter, or as to the 
style in which it should be couched. And 
Adams was there, the brilliant John 
Adams, with his wealth of knowledge and 
readiness to command it, likewise a mem- 
ber of the committee ; but he too, for aught 
that appears to the contrary, left the 
preparation and the composition of that 



Thomas Jefferson 23 

world-famous document entirely to Jef- 
ferson, who, at the time, was only thirty- 
three years of age. 

Thus did Jefferson improve an oppor- 
tunity, which might properly be called a 
"psychological moment," and that, too, 
without the benefit of a precedent to guide 
or guard him in the construction of the 
instrument. It is true that certain ones 
have claimed that John Milton's writings 
furnished the key as well as the form of 
the Declaration of Independence. But 
did Jefferson ever acknowledge it? He was 
too great a man not to give credit to whom 
credit was due; and all the world knows 
that he placed his authorship of that docu- 
ment upon a plane even higher than the 
highest office in the gift of the people, 
which he afterwards filled, that of Presi- 
dent of the United States. He had a 
right to feel proud of that work; it was 
destined to be an epoch-making document. 
He did not intend it simply as the fore- 
runner of a revolution no longer to be 
resisted, but as an instrument to estab- 



24 Great Americans 

lish or to aid in the establishment of a 
new order of government, in which the 
people were to be supreme, and subject to 
no laws except those which they them- 
selves should make through their own 
representatives duly chosen for that pur- 
pose. The ancient despotisms and govern- 
ments were based upon the principle or 
theory that the monarch was supreme and 
the people subordinate, with no right to 
make laws, but must obey those decreed 
or proclaimed by the monarch alone. This 
principle is not wholly extinguished, but 
exists in a shadowy way in all monarchi- 
cal countries, and its poison was the es- 
sential factor in the downfall of Germany 
and the ruin of her throne in the late 
world-war. Some men fail when put to 
the supreme test; but not Jefferson. He 
did his work with such marvelous skill 
and completeness, that he must ever rank 
as one of the most illustrious men America 
has yet produced. 



John Adams 25 

But there was an opportunity which 
might, with exceptional precision, be 
called a "psychological moment" in the 
life of John Adams^ a moment, which 
many might think quite the equal in im- 
portance of that which Jefferson so 
promptly improved — the naming of Wash- 
ington as the Commander-in-Chief of the 
American forces — a contribution to the 
success of the patriot cause in its value 
impossible to over-estimate. It appears 
that when that question came up for de- 
cision, or rather for discussion, John 
Adams, after several names had been sug- 
gested of which none created any enthu- 
siasm, saw at once how fatal the conse- 
quences might be if a mistake in that 
direction should be made at the beginning. 
In his unerring vision of the future he 
saw a prolonged conflict. He saw infinite 
troubles and passions that would test the 
very heart of the patriot cause. He saw 
the need of a man whose wisdom, judg- 
ment, patience, and fadeless faith in the 
justice of that cause would endure to the 
end. In short, he saw the man Washing- 



26 Great Americans 

ton, the heroic Washington, the victorious 
Washington, the only man fit for the 
place, but who had not yet been named. 
Rising grandly superior to state pride, 
casting aside any such consideration as 
unworthy the time or place, appreciating 
the tremendous responsibilities that the 
war would entail, having as his highest 
aspiration the success of the revolution 
and the independence of his country, after 
a brief eulogy of the man, he named 
(according to one or two authorities 
nominated) George Washington of Vir- 
ginia as the proper person for that posi- 
tion; and shortly thereafter Washington 
was unanimously elected as the Com- 
mander-in-Chief of the American forces. 

It is useless, of course, at this time, to 
speculate as to what would or might have 
been the result of the war had not Wash- 
ington at the beginning been placed in 
supreme command. His capacity as a 
military man had already been tested 
upon many a field. His courage and skill 
in the conduct of troops in the frontier 



John Adams 27 

wars were without parallel. His name 
was synonymous with truth, virtue and 
patriotism. If it were needed that a 
commander should infuse courage, faith, 
patriotism, with all their attendant bene- 
fits, into the hearts and minds of those 
for whom he would fight, that man was 
Washington. He was born for the place 
and the place was created for him. So it 
seemed. It is probable that he would 
have been given the place, in any event, 
at some time. But when? Ah, "to be or 
not to be'- willing to acknowledge a mis- 
take, and if willing, then instantly to cor- 
rect it, "that's the question!" Pride, 
prejudice, ignorance, hatred, jealousy, 
envy, treacher}^, no matter what the occa- 
sion, station or situation, have been ever 
the bane of over-selfish, over-proud, over- 
ambitious individuals, operating in or 
upon their minds at times so powerfully, 
that they are willing, it seems, to sacri- 
fice the very cause which they have taken 
up arms to establish, even to risk their 
own lives, rather than to see another 
succeed, if by his success that other is 



28 Great Americans 

likely to gain a renown that will cast 
their own reputations into the shade. 

Suppose that Lee, whose treachery to 
Washington at Monmouth almost 
wrecked the patriot fortunes, had been 
given the chief command? What char- 
acter had Lee to sustain? What reputa- 
tion could he have given to the patriot 
cause? Was he not simply an adventurer 
who had espoused the cause of the pa- 
triots? Did his patriotism extend beyond 
his personal fortunes? And yet he had the 
effrontery to criticise a man almost 
infinitely his superior, even Washington 
himself. 

Hesitation is becoming in the mention 
of Arnold, — the hero of Saratoga, the 
traitor at W^est Point. There were evi- 
dently two Arnolds, a good and a bad 
one, struggling under the same skin, each 
contending for the supremacy according 
to circumstances. At Saratoga the good 
Arnold triumphed ; at West Point, the bad 
one. Such a catastrophe to character, 
reputation and brilliant promise has no 



George Washington 29 

duplicate in American history. Suppose 
that Arnold had been given the chief 
command? or Gates? It was not so to 
be. 

All honor to Adams! His fame, like 
Jefferson's, like Franklin's, is deathless, 
and his place among the foremost master 
builders of his country is forever secure. 



And what of Washington, the hero of 
the revolution, the father of his country? 
Was there any special moment in his 
career, fairly distinguishable from all his 
other acts, that may be called his "psycho- 
logical moment?" Yes, but it happened 
when he was about to complete his cabi- 
net, after he had been chosen President 
of the United States, and will be referred 
to in connection with that subject. His 
career as a w^hole was so great, so unique 
and exceptional, that it is rather in con- 
trast with others that his greatness may 
be seen. But with whom should he be 
compared? With Caesar? Were they 
not more unlike than like? Their motives 



30 Great Americans 

were different; their ambitions were dif- 
ferent; their purposes were continents 
apart. Caesar fought to make Caesar 
great; Washington, for his country's 
greatness. Caesar fought for the exten- 
sion of tyranny; Washington, for the 
establishment of liberty. Caesar fought 
that Rome might absorb the rest of the 
known world; Washington, for the erec- 
tion of the American Union. Rome, by 
its very name, inspired terror to other 
peoples. The American Union is the hope 
of the world. Nevertheless, 

In the enduring qualities of fame, 
Washington and Caesar are just the same. 

The surrender of Cornwallis at York- 
town, however, while it ended the Revo- 
lution, did not establish the American 
Union, at least not the one prefigured in 
the Declaration of Independence. That 
struggle was to come at a later time, not 
to be settled with powder and shot, but 
with brighter and keener weapons, ora- 
tory and argument. 



George Washington 31 

When the Constitution, or rather the 
proposed Constitution of 1787 was sub- 
mitted to the several states for ratifica- 
tion or rejection, opposition of the most 
emphatic character suddenly developed 
in some of the states, particularly in Vir- 
ginia and Massachusetts, whose repre- 
sentatives had actually participated in 
the labors of the Convention which had 
produced the very document itself. 
Patrick Henry, whose liberty speech had 
been declaimed by every school boy in 
America, was now exclaiming, "Give me 
liberty or give me death, but not the Con- 
stitution of '87.'' He declared it would 
be dangerous to the liberties of the people. 
Among other alleged defects, he professed 
to see unlimited opportunities for the 
country to slide into a monarchy by rea- 
son of the lack of check on the Presi- 
dent's power to perpetuate himself in 
office, the instrument not limiting the 
President to any one or more terms. In 
addition to his splendid powers of ora- 
tory, Henry had the faculty of making the 
arguments of his opponents to appear, not 



32 Great Americans 

only weak, but utterly illogical and 
founded on false premises. It was only 
after Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, 
Hamilton, Madison, Jay, and many 
others, including John Marshall, had 
either spoken or written in favor of its 
adoption, and had clearly proven that the 
arguments of Henry and his associates 
were unsound, that Virginia ratified the 
Constitution by a majority of ten votes. 

It was a wonderful debate — the most 
splendid intellectual contest of which any 
country or age has a record — worthy the 
men, worthy the occasion. Demosthenes, 
the echo of whose eloquence, it is said, is 
still heard among the ruins of the Parthe- 
non, had no such audience or such a cause. 
He spoke for himself, his glory alone was 
his theme. Cicero thundered at Catiline, 
a dangerous conspirator, whose expulsion 
from Kome he demanded and finally suc- 
ceeded in securing. Burke fell into the 
arms of a friend when he had finished 
his indictment of Hastings; but the in- 
dictment failed in the end. How trivial 



George Washington 33 

were they all when compared with the 
question: ^^Shall the United States of 
America be established under a Constitu- 
tion, limiting and defining the powers of 
her President and Congress, and yet pre- 
serving to each State her own Constitu- 
tion, limiting and defining the powers of 
her Governor and Legislature, neither to 
be in conflict with the other, but all to 
operate in harmony to promote the pros- 
perity and happiness of the whole peo- 
ple?" 

From the dawn of civilization, no such 
question or proposition had ever before 
been presented to the consideration and 
judgment of an intelligent people. It w^as 
no wonder that a diversity of opinion de- 
veloped at an early stage; it was an ex- 
cellent thing to happen; it excited thi 
widest discussion. Indeed it might w^ith 
the utmost propriety be said that the en- 
tire period of debate was the one supreme 
"psychological moment" of the American 
people, being grandly improved by their 
ablest representatives ; for when that dis- 
cussion was ended and the Constitution 



34 Great Americans 

finally adopted, every provision of that 
instrument was perfectly known to every 
man, woman and child in the land, who 
could read the English language. 



The new government was quickly or- 
ganized. The Chief Executive had no op- 
position. Who but Washington for Presi- 
dent? And who but Adams for Vice- 
President? But the President must have 
a Cabinet. He gave to General Knox the 
portfolio of War; to Jefferson the port- 
folio of State. But now was the diJBaculty 
— to whom should he assign the post of 
Secretary of the Treasury? At the time it 
was considered the most important and 
responsible of all. So much depended 
upon the administration of the duties of 
that office that the entire question, not 
only as to whether the Ship of State 
could be made to float to sea, but whether, 
after getting there, she could keep her 
course, would be largely in the keeping 
of the man whom the President should 
appoint to that position. Was there such 



Alexander Hamilton 35 

a man? Yes. Who? Alexander Hamil- 
ton. Then occurred the one supreme 
"psychological moment" in Washington's 
life, and which he promptly improved by 
offering the position to Hamilton ; and if 
ever there was a "psychological moment" 
in Hamilton's life which he promptly 
improved, it was when he immediately 
accepted the appointment. 



Who was Alexander Hamilton? He 
was a man of such intellectual stature 
that Jefferson alone could reach him. 
He was a man of such brilliant oratorical 
power that Adams alone could match 
him. He w^as a man of such far-seeing 
vision, such accuracy of apprehension of 
the financial needs of the new govern- 
ment, and of such incorruptible integrity, 
that Washington alone might surpass 
him. 

Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Hamil- 
ton ! Shall we ever see their superiors in 
all that constitutes true greatness? 



36 Great Americans 

The Ship seems destined to a prosper- 
ous voyage; it sails proudly out to sea. 
It finds its area of operation suddenly 
doubled by the fortunate jjurchase of 
what was known as the Louisiana terri- 
tory, a stroke of good luck or possibly of 
brilliant statesmanship on the part of 
President Jefferson to whom the credit 
is generally given, although according to 
Mr. Jefferson himself the credit belongs 
quite as much to his tw^o commissioners, 
James Monroe and Robert R. Livingston, 
through whose consummate tact and skill 
the negotiations for its acquisition were 
conducted and concluded, and the terri- 
tory actually ceded to the United States 
by Napoleon himself, the arch-genius of 
France. 



In 1823 James Monroe, as President of 
the United States, acting under the in- 
spiration of the occasion, in a message to 
Congress, his truly "psychological mo- 
ment,'' was destined to achieve a fame 
quite equal, if not superior to that which 



James Monroe 37 

he achieved as a commissioner in the pur- 
chase of the Louisiana territory, by his 
declaration of the principle that has come 
to be known as the ^^Monroe Doctrine," a 
doctrine or principle that as it was not 
the policy or purpose of the United States 
to interfere in the affairs of the European 
governments, such governments should 
not interfere in the affairs of the Ameri- 
can governments, whether of North or 
South America, "and that any attempt 
on the part of European powers to ex- 
tend their systems on this continent, or 
any interference to oppress, or in any 
manner to control the destiny of, govern- 
ments whose independence had been 
acknowledged by the United States, would 
be regarded as a manifestation of an un- 
friendly feeling toward this government, 
and would be treated accordingly,'' — a 
doctrine to which our government is so 
completely and unreservedly committed 
that any violation of the same on the part 
of any foreign government or power 
would arouse at once such a universal 
chorus of protest, that a million of arms 



38 Great Americans 

on a moment's notice would rush to vin- 
dicate its wisdom, justice and authority. 
And it is only proper to say that no Euro- 
pean power has ever violated or attempted 
to violate this doctrine, either directly or 
indirectly, either in letter or in spirit, ex- 
cept once, when our government was in 
the throes of civil war and Mexico in a 
state of anarchy. This was in 1863, when 
Louis Napoleon, Emperor of France, tak- 
ing advantage of the situation, yielding to 
pressure from certain Mexican notables, 
members of the conservative party, who 
had appealed to him to send over a ruler 
and restore Mexico to an orderly govern- 
ment, permitted the ill-fated Maximilian, 
an Austrian archduke, to assume the 
reins of the Mexican government in 1864. 
But the Mexican liberal party, being in 
the majority, repudiated his authority 
and right to rule, and finally after a war- 
fare of three years, Maximilian (who in 
the meantime had been left to himself, 
Napoleon having withdrawn from the 
enterprise upon the peremptory request 
of the United States), was overwhelm- 



James Monroe 39 

inglj defeated, taken prisoner, tried by 
court-martial, found guilty and put to 
death. Thus ended in a miserable fiasco 
the attempt on the part of Louis Napo- 
leon to establish a monarchy over, or to 
control the government or destiny of 
Mexico, a part of the western continent, 
in violation of the "Monroe Doctrine," — 
a violation of the principle of non-inter- 
ference in American affairs which cannot 
be committed even in spirit, without 
bringing upon the culprit the punish- 
ment his conduct deserves. 

Thus did James Monroe, by a proper 
appreciation of his duty to his country as 
its President, and with the conviction and 
courage of an American statesman, win 
an immortality of fame as a patriot ; and 
his message to Congress in which he made 
this epochal declaration is or ought to 
be placed forever by the side of the Decla- 
ration of American Independence. 

But at length a storm arises ; it grows 
in volume and strength; it threatens the 
Ship of State. Who will save it? All 



40 Great Americans 

hopes seem to center in one man — Daniel 
Webster. Would you like to know him? 
Emerson's pen-picture of the great man 
is a faithful likeness, showing the spec- 
tacle of a human idol witnessing the peo- 
ple at his feet ; and then the idol gradually 
turning into clay, with scarcely a wor- 
shiper to be seen. 

Vol. I, Emerson's Journal, p. 175: 
"W>bster was chosen representative to 
Congress by a majority of 1,078 votes 
this morning, November 4, 1822." 

Vol. II, p. 295: ^^Read with admira- 
tion and delight Mr. Webster's noble 
speech in answer to Hayne. W^hat 
consciousness of political rectitude, and 
what confidence in his intellectual 
treasures must he have to enable him 
to take this master's tone. The beauty 
and dignity of the spectacle he exhibits 
should teach men the beauty and dig- 
nity of principles^' 

Vol. Ill, p. 471: "Daniel Webster, 



Daniel Webster 41 

Nature's own child, sat there [at Lex- 
ington] all day, and drew all eyes." 

Vol. V, p. 243 : "With those devour- 
ing eyes, with that portraying hand, 
Carlyle has seen Webster." 

Vol. VI, p. 341: "His external ad- 
vantages are very rare and admirable; 
his noble and majestic frame, his 
breadth and projection of brows, his 
coal-black hair, his great cinderous 
eyes, his perfect self-possession, and the 
rich and well-modulated thunder (to 
which I used to listen, sometimes, ab- 
stracting myself from his sense merely 
for the luxury of such noble explosions 
of sound) distinguish him from all 
other men. In a million you would 
single him out. . . . He has misused 
the opportunity of making himself the 
darling of the American people in all 
coming time by abstaining from putting 
himself at the head of the An ti- Slavery 
interest, by standing for New England. 



42 Great Americans 

... He is intellect applied to affairs. 
He is the greatest of lawyers." 

Vol. VIII, p. 45: "It is true that 
Webster has never done anything up to 
the promise of his faculties. He is un- 
mistakably able, and might have ruled 
America, but he was cowardly, and has 
spent his life in specialties. When shall 
we see as rich a vase again?" 

Vol. VIII, p. 182: "Pho! Let Mr. 
Webster, for decency's sake, shut his 
lips once and forever on this word. The 
word liberty in the mouth of Mr. Web- 
ster sounds like the word love in the 
mouth of a courtesan." 

Vol. VIII, p. 216: "Webster's ab- 
sence of moral faculty is degrading to 
the country." 

Only one more quotation from that 
painstaking Journal. Mr. Webster is 
dead. Mr. Emerson seems to see some- 
thing in the distance, which gradually 



Daniel Webster 43 

assumes, though imperfectly, the godlike 
proportions of his once great idol. 

Vol. VIII, p. 335: "Last Sunday I 
was at Plymouth on the beach, and 
looked across the hazy water — to 
Marshfield. I supposed Webster must 
have passed away, as indeed he had died 
at three in the morning. . . . Nature had 
not in our days, or not since Napoleon, 
cut out such a masterpiece. He was a 
man in equilihrio . . . ^Os, oculosque 
Jovi par.' . . . But alas ! He was the vic- 
tim of his ambition; to please the 
South betrayed the North, and was 
thrown out by both." 

Nevertheless, this was the mighty man 
who had saved the Ship when the great 
storm arose thirty years before. What 
had he done to alienate the friendship of 
the Sage of Concord, as well as the friend- 
ship of multitudes of his Northern 
friends? What had he done? He had sim- 
ply added another proof to what was al- 
ready incontestable, that no man is so 



44 Great Americans 

great as to be all greatness ; that no man 
can be so perfect as to be all perfection. 
He had been the superman of the North, 
and the North wanted him to remain such. 
It did not consider that a man of such 
superlative greatness would naturally 
some day wish to become President, and 
that to become such he must make himself 
available as a candidate. He became a can- 
didate ; and as such he deemed it prudent 
to set his house in order, to build his po- 
litical fences, and to do such other things 
as a candidate usually finds it necessary 
or expedient to do to make himself accept- 
able to his party. 

But Mr. Webster, while the greatest of 
statesmen, was one of the poorest of poli- 
ticians. Had he been less of a statesman 
and more of a politician, he would have 
seen absolute death to all his aspirations 
for the Presidency in any support he 
might be induced to give to those radical 
compromise measures of Mr. Clay in 1850. 
Whether Mr. Clay intended those meas- 
ures as a trap to Mr. Webster, or whether 
they reflected his honest judgment and 



Daniel Webster 45 

convictions, it is certain that Mr. Web- 
ster, by Ms support of those measures in 
his so-called "Seventh of March speech," 
whatever the impression he might have 
made in the minds of the Southern people, 
quite obliterated the impression of his 
availability as a candidate from the minds 
of his Northern friends, at least from the 
minds of the majority of his friends. 

What then is availability? It is some- 
times claimed that to be available, the 
candidate is not necessarily required to 
possess an extraordinary intelligence, but 
only a respectable amount, supplemented 
by an agreeable character, willing to take 
orders from his party chiefs. But, if the 
history of political conventions, and espe- 
cially the history of the Presidents them- 
selves, furnish any guide to the actual 
requirements of the office, such a concep- 
tion of availability is almost wholly with- 
out authority or support. On the con- 
trary, with rare exceptions, the success- 
ful candidate was distinguished, not only 
by his splendid intelligence, but by his 



46 Great Americans 

splendid courage and strength of char- 
acter. 

The examples are plentiful. 

Washington was so evenly balanced in 
all his characteristics that he might prop- 
erly be said to stand alone. 

Adams was a man of such solid quali- 
fications that he naturally became the 
successor of Washington. 

Jefferson's learning and brilliant at- 
tainments were almost as universal as 
Francis Bacon's. 

Madison was a man of such masterful 
abilities that he barely escaped being a 
genius. Besides, he has the reputation 
of being the "Father of the Constitution." 
What greater honor could a man achieve? 

Monroe's passport to fame was not 
alone his connection with the purchase of 
the Louisiana territory, but his immortal 
declaration of "The Monroe Doctrine." 

Jackson, while possessing considerable 
intelligence, and a wonderful reputation 
as a warrior, was likewise possessed of a 
character for firmness that had its coun- 
terpart mostly in steel or brass. 



Daniel Webster 47 

Lincoln's learning, while not universal, 
was yet of such a character as to make 
him a national figure. He was greatly 
distinguished as a logician as well as a 
statesman; and his speeches were com- 
posed in such elegant English that they 
were taken by the universities as models 
of grace and style. 

Grant's unparalleled military achieve- 
ments, rare common sense, and splendid 
patriotism served him well during the 
eight years he was the occupant of the 
White House. 

Garfield, cut down by an assassin, had 
but little opportunity to show his peculiar 
aptitude for that office; but his long ex- 
perience in the House of Representatives 
had already given him a national reputa- 
tion as a statesman, orator and patriot. 

Cleveland left the presidential chair 
with such distinction as a statesman, such 
honor as a patriot, and such renown for 
his ability as Chief Magistrate that after 
an interval of four years he was again 
elected to that office, succeeding Benja- 



48 Great Americans 

min Harrison, a very great lawyer and a 
wise and prudent executive. 

McKinley was probably the most lov- 
able man that was ever elected President. 
His pre-eminent fitness for that office was 
never disputed. He did not enter the 
Spanish-Cuban war quite as quickly as 
some critics desired, but when he did, the 
blow which he struck ended forever the 
tyranny of Spain in the western world. 

Roosevelt was a man something like 
Washington, — standing practically by 
himself. His exceeding intelligence, his 
almost superhuman achievements as 
President, soldier, hunter, and in every 
capacity in which he acted, lift him high 
among the illustrious Americans. His 
fame must ever grow brighter as the years 
roll around. 

Mr. Taft, Mr. Wilson, and Mr. Harding 
are still among the living. The versatility 
of Mr. Taft, with his record of office-hold- 
ing, including his present office of Chief 
Justice of the Supreme Court of the 
United States, make him a world figure. 

Mr. Wilson is hard to characterize. At 



Daniel Webster 49 

one time he had the world at his feet. 
Whether he will ever see it there again 
time only can tell. But for strength of 
intelligence, masterful ability as a writer 
and speaker and for comprehensive and 
enlightened st\atesmanship, he has few 
equals and hardly a superior. 

Mr. Harding is the admiration of all. 
His superior mental endowments, his fine 
personality, his constant desire that his 
country shall not fail in the performance 
of all her obligations, fit him in an emi- 
nent degree for the office of Chief Magis- 
trate. He has supreme control of him- 
self, and is exceedingly popular with the 
people. His "psychological moments" 
have been many, and history will say of 
him that he was not disobedient to any. 

What then is availability? Not wealth 
of intelligence alone, nor magnitude of 
services as a statesman alone; but wealth 
of intelligence, supplemented by a char- 
acter so strong that under no circum- 
stances will its possessor compromise or 
consent to a compromise with principle, 



50 Great Americans 

even for a moment. Mr. Webster had, in 
the opinion of his Northern friends, com- 
promised with principle, and his avail- 
ability as a candidate was at an end. 

But, however fatal may have been his 
"Seventh of March speech" to his presi- 
dential aspirations in 1850, he is forever 
entitled to the gratitude and affections of 
the American people for his inestimable 
service to the nation, when, thirty years 
before, standing in the United States 
Senate, clearly the most distinguished 
figure in public life, whether in this or in 
any other land, he proceeded to unfold, 
in his reply to Hayne, the true principles 
upon which this nation was organized, 
demonstrating with a wealth of argument 
and illustration not only the indissolu- 
bility of the American Union, but the es- 
sential unsoundness of the doctrine that 
the United States was simply a compact 
between or among the states, and not a 
compact by and among all the people of 
the United States. If the Union was 
simply a compact by and among the 



Daniel Webster 51 

several states, then the Union was simply 
a rope of sand, dissolvable at the will of 
the states, or of any one of the states. 
The American Union was not the creation 
of the states, but the creation of all the 
people of all the states, and therefore the 
United States must of necessity be su> 
perior to any of the states in sovereignty 
and authority as to any and all of the 
powers expressed or implied in the Con- 
stitution of the American Union. It was 
a wonderful argument, made by the 
greatest lawyer, orator and statesman in 
the land. An extended analysis would be 
inappropriate as well as impossible here. 
It deserves to be studied, not only by the 
lawyer and jurist, but by the student of 
history as well. 

If was, of course, a great occasion, just 
such an opportunity or "psychological 
moment" as Mr. Webster needed for the 
display of his marvelous ability as a con- 
stitutional lawyer. Mr. Hayne himself 
was a strong antagonist and a brilliant 
debater. His skill in the statement of 



52 Great Americans 

legal propositions was only surpassed by 
that of Mr. Webster himself. Both im- 
proved the occasion to the uttermost, and 
their names and fame are a part of the 
heritage of the American people. 

What, then, becomes of the proposition, 
so zealously advocated by a certain class 
of statesmen or would-be statesmen, that 
a League of Nations could be effectively 
formed without a compact by and among 
all the people of the confederating na- 
tions, but by simply a compact among the 
said nations themselves? Would not such 
a League be wholly ineffective, a mere 
rope of sand, as Mr. Webster clearly 
proved? If, however, it is proposed to 
form a League upon the plan of the 
American Union, a Union which is su- 
perior in sovereignty, power and author- 
ity to any of the nations entering into it, 
as to the purposes of the League to be 
expressed in its Constitution, then it is 
manifest that such a League cannot be 
effectively formed without a compact by 
and among all the people of the several 



Daniel Webstee 53 

nations proposing to form a League. The 
American Union, made up of many states, 
was effectively formed in a way that gave 
to the Union a power and sovereignty 
superior to any of the states as to the 
powers expressed or necessarily implied 
in the Constitution of the Union. As to 
those powers expressed or necessarily 
implied each state was subordinate and 
obliged to yield to the superior sover- 
eignty of the nation. How otherwise 
could the nation exist as a nation? How 
otherwise could a League of Nations ex- 
ist for a moment? Mr. Webster clearly 
demonstrated that if the American Union 
was simply the creation of the states, then 
it was nothing more than an emotional 
Union, dissolvable at the will of the states 
or of any of the states, existing only so 
long as all of the states deemed it in har- 
mony with their emotions or will. 

Of course, the controversy does not and 
cannot center upon any such League as 
that, but rather upon how an effective 
League can be formed by a lawful dele- 
gation of power by or from any of the 



54 Great Americans 

several nations which should unite to 
form a League. So far as the United 
States is concerned, her Constitution con- 
tains no power to delegate power for the 
creation of a League of Nations. She may 
enter into treaties with other nations in 
the manner provided in the Constitution. 
A League of Nations, however, is not a 
treaty, but the creation of a super-nation ; 
for that is just what a League of Nations 
would have to be in order to have any 
jurisdiction, power or authority superior 
to any of the nations entering into it as 
to any of the powers expressed in its Con- 
stitution or agreement to form a League. 
If, therefore, the United States has no 
power to enter into a League of Nations, 
by virtue of its powers as expressed in 
the Constitution, then to enable it to do 
so, it is evident that the Constitution it- 
self would have to be amended, either in 
such a way as to have the whole contro- 
versy settled by a direct vote of the people, 
or by an amendment that would enable 
the President or Senate, or both the Presi- 
dent and Senate, to aid in the creation 



Daniel Webster 55 

of such a League in the manner provided 
by the amendment. 

In the event of such a League being 
formed in such a manner, so far as the 
United States is concerned, what would 
be the result? Would not the United 
States necessarily assume precisely the 
same relations to the League as each of 
the states of the American Union assumes 
to the Union itself? Her position in the 
League would be one of subordination to 
the League ; and to that extent, or to the 
extent of the powers she had granted, she 
would be inferior to the League, both in 
sovereignty and authority; and neces- 
sarily so, because she would have so 
agreed when her Constitution was 
amended for that purpose. 

A nation has power, inherent power, 
to protect itself against invasion, insur- 
rection or rebellion; in other words, it 
has the inherent power to protect itself 
from destruction. But has it the power 
to amend its Constitution in such a man- 
ner as to change or transform the nation 
into some other kind of nation, wholly 



56 Great Americans 

different from that which was expressed 
in its Constitution before such an amend- 
ment? A nation supreme in its sover- 
eignty, authority and independence 
manifestly cannot vote away any part 
of such sovereignty, authority and inde- 
pendence, however small the part, without 
diminishing its sovereignty and su- 
premacy to the extent voted away. And 
to the extent voted away, or to the extent 
expressed in the Constitution of the 
League, does it not necessarily acknowl- 
edge the superior sovereignty, authority 
and power of the League? 

In case of any conflict between the 
League and any one or more nations 
forming the League, who is to settle the 
controversy? If the controversy should 
be between the League and the United 
States, would the Supreme Court of the 
United States have jurisdiction of the 
subject-matter? Of course not. That 
question was settled by Mr. Webster be- 
yond all possibility of doubt. His reply 
to Hayne established the principle that 
when a conflict arose between a state and 



Daniel Webster 57 

the nation as to whether a state was 
bound to obey an act of Congress, the na- 
tion was superior to the state (assuming, 
of course, that the Congress had exercised 
or had attempted to exercise no power 
not expressed in the Constitution of the 
Union, and further assuming that the Act 
of Congress had been declared to be con- 
stitutional by the Supreme Court of the 
United States). Would not the same 
principle apply between a League of Na- 
tions and any one of its states in case of 
a conflict between them? 

The United States should be proud of 
herself today, standing as a beacon light 
to all the other nations in the world. If 
she ever enters into a League of Nations, 
let it be done in such a manner that no 
possible harm can come either to her peo- 
ple or institutions in the least degree. 
But we stand with W^ebster, who, while 
demonstrating the indissolubility of the 
American Union as then existent under 
its Constitution, unconsciously demon- 
strated the impracticability of that Union 
ever entering into a League of Nations. 



58 Great Americans 

But Webster was yet alive when Har- 
riet Beecher Stowe began her radiant 
career as a writer and social reformer, 
playing a part in the drama of the nation 
in a manner so noble as to constitute an 
epoch, one of the most brilliant in the 
political as well as in the literary history 
of the United States. In culture, char- 
acter and depth of human sympathy, her 
whole life was in perfect accord with the 
ideals of that celebrated family of which 
she was a member, being the daughter of 
Dr. Lyman S. Beecher, an eminent divine, 
and sister of the world-renowned orator 
and minister, Henry Ward Beecher. 

The spectacle of a human slave on 
American soil was an anomaly to this 
gifted woman. The institution which 
could claim absolute power over a human 
being was reconcilable neither to her con- 
science nor to the purposes of God, and 
she resolved to give it a blow, and to its 
death, if she could. Her "psychological 
moment" was one of the brightest that 
ever flashed upon the mind of woman or 
man in the revelation of the exceptional 



Harriet Beecher Stowe 59 

work she was required to do, and to which 
she was instantly obedient. She wrote 
a book, called "Uncle Tom's Cabin," so 
charming in style, so entrancing in inter- 
est, so thrilling in deed, so varied in char- 
acter, so full of the tenderest pathos and 
feeling, so sparkling with humor, and 
withal so dramatic in action, that its 
fame, even at the present time, is almost 
as great as when it first appeared three 
quarters of a century ago. Translated 
into every known language, and exhibited 
upon the stage to countless millions of 
people, at home and abroad, the story of 
Uncle Tom and Little Eva, and all the 
other characters in that matchless book, 
seems destined to endure, if not forever, 
at least for ages yet to come. 

What a fame! What a glory! Fade- 
less, deathless, eternal! Mrs. Stow8 
wrought a most splendid service to the 
nation. Her book exercised a tremendous 
influence for good. But it did not of itself 
accomplish the purpose of the book. 
That event took place just eleven years 
after it first saw the light. The stroke was 



60 Great Americans 

made by a still mightier pen, by a still 
mightier soul; but the stroke was easier 
by reason of the labors of this wonderful 
woman, who is entitled to rank among the 
illustrious dead. 



And now we come to another great 
woman, another great American, one of 
the greatest of her sex, one whose 
"psychological moment'' was quite as 
luminous and certain as Mrs. Stowe's — 
Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the pioneer, 
leader, peerless orator and advocate of 
that popular, heroic, nation-wide move- 
ment known as "Woman's Rights." While 
Mrs. Stowe with her magical pen was 
enlisting thousands of eloquent voices to 
aid in the work in which she was engaged 
while writing and publishing in serial 
form the story of "Uncle Tom," Mrs. 
Stanton with her magical voice was en- 
listing thousands of eloquent pens, per- 
haps none more effective than Susan B. 
Anthony's, to aid in the work in which 
she was engaged — the emancipation of 



Elizabeth Cady Stanton 61 

woman. Each believed in the righteous- 
ness of her cause, and labored to bring it 
to pass with a fidelity unsurpassed in the 
history of mankind. 

Mrs. Stanton did not, like Mrs. Stowe, 
live to see the triumph of her cause; but 
had her splendid life been spared a few 
years longer she would have realized the 
fruition of her hopes and ambitions to the 
very limit of her dreams, not only cr^-stal- 
lized and secured in the form of an amend- 
ment to the Constitution, but for her 
crowning joy she would have seen bril- 
liant representatives of her sex actually 
sitting in the seats of the mighty, per- 
forming their duties as lawmakers with 
the utmost dignity and success. 

It probablj^ would serve no useful pur- 
pose to enter upon any extended compari- 
son of the respective merits of the two 
causes in which these two extraordinary 
women were engaged, not including the 
miscellaneous writings of Mrs. Stowe, 
outside of "Uncle Tom's Cabin.'' It 



62 Great Americans 

might be said, however, that "as one star 
differs from another star in glory," so 
differs the character of the work each per- 
formed. To lift up the one upon whom 
Nature herself had seemed to place her 
mark of inferiority and bondage, appeared 
to be a task too herculean for human 
achievement, too difficult and fanciful for 
serious endeavor. And yet the bondman 
became the freedman, the freeman and 
the citizen, to the imperishable glory of 
the nation whose corner-stone was and 
is the Declaration of American Inde- 
pendence. 

But "Woman's Rights," — what were 
they? If natural to man^ a proper quali- 
fication, then why not natural to woman? 
Of course, they are natural neither to 
man nor woman, being purely artificial, 
man-made, that is all. Why, then, was 
woman deprived of these rights, though 
artificial they may be? The answer is 
not difficult. Way back in the dim, dark 
ages of antiquity, man, being the stronger, 
assumed as his natural prerogative the 



Elizabeth Cady Stanton 63 

right to leadership, the right to rule, look- 
ing upon woman, who was the weaker, as 
his inferior, and treating her as such. 
This is easily understandable. But the 
curious thing is, the mystical and puzzling 
thing, that man, the American, after 
emerging from his primitive state, after 
becoming more and more enlightened, 
after acquiring wisdom by experience and 
education, after the completest evidence 
of "woman's rights" had been established 
a thousand times or more, should still 
stand by that ancient classification, yield- 
ing at last only when by withholding them 
further he would convict himself not only 
of an arbitrary exercise of power, but of 
arbitrarily and knowingly continuing a 
manifest wrong. 

Thus within the memory of many who 
are now living, two of the most extraordi- 
nary, significant and epoch-making events 
have occurred within the United States, — 
the extinction of slavery and the enfran- 
chisement of woman — contributions to a 
civilization the highest yet achieved, and 



64 Great Americans 

extending far beyond the borders of our 
own republic. 

And yet, strange as it may appear, cer- 
tain writers and historians apparently 
take the greatest delight in referring to 
Greece, either as the repository of all 
human greatness or as the source from 
which all human greatness has sprung. 
Even so eminent a jurist as the late Sir 
Henr}^ Sumner Maine, once wrote : "Ex- 
cept the blind forces of nature, there is 
nothing that moves in the world today 
that is not Greek in origin." 

A beautiful tribute, but manifestly too 
broad. Take religion for instance. Is it 
a blind force of nature, or one of the most 
intense of spiritual forces? Is there any- 
thing in the literature of Greece that 
corresponds to the Hebrew conception of 
the Deity or to its ceremonial worship of 
the one God? Would it be strictly his- 
torical to say that the Christian religion 
had its origin in Greece? Why, when St. 
Paul spoke to the Athenians of "the resur- 
rection of the dead, some mocked: and 



Elizabeth Cady Stanton 65 

others said, We will hear thee again of 
this matter.'^ 

Equally unfortunate is the statement 
when applied to the political affairs of 
Greece. It never occurred to her wisest 
statesman, either when Athens or when 
Sparta was supreme, that the Common- 
wealth could be improved, or be made to 
gain in power, dignity or in the happiness 
of her people, by the extinction of slavery 
or the elevation of woman to political 
equality with man. As a result one- 
fourth of her people were kept in bondage, 
and the woman who was not a slave was 
the chattel of her husband or father. In 
vain do we look through the laws of Lycur- 
gus, of Solon or of Pericles for even a 
suggestion of that broad and humane 
principle of statesmanship which guar- 
antees to all citizens absolute equality of 
civil and political rights, with a corre- 
sponding obligation of the government to 
protect each and all citizens in the exer- 
cise of those rights. 

The Greek was never at his best as a 
statesman, even when the civilization and 



66 Great Americans 

culture of Greece were in their meridian 
splendor, which was about five hundred 
years before the dawn of the Christian 
era. He was rather at his best when, with 
chisel or brush, he was carving a statue 
or painting a figure, gradually conform- 
ing it to an intellectual conception of 
physical beauty, not surpassed, or even 
equalled, to this day. Or, when compet- 
ing in the building of a glorious tragedy, 
using his language as a tool, polishing and 
developing it to such a degree of perfec- 
tion that it became and still is the un- 
rivalled medium for the expression of 
thought, however sublime the image or 
delicate the idea. And in the realms of 
philosophy and speculation, no country 
can present greater names than those of 
Socrates and Plato. But in the concep- 
tion, development and application of those 
broad, humane and enlightened prin- 
ples of constructive statesmanship to a 
representative form of government, such 
as we have in the United States, the 
American statesman stands pre-eminent. 



Abraham Lincoln 67 

But however glorious the services of 
Mrs. Stowe and her co-laborers in behalf 
of universal freedom, the Temple of 
Liberty was, even so late as 1860, still left 
with the flaw which it bore when she 
first put forth her famous book. Who was 
to remove the flaw? Who was to perfect 
the Temple? Who was to put it into that 
condition conceived by Jefferson so as to 
make it establish the purposes of the Dec- 
laration of Independence, among them 
the freedom of all men, and their absolute 
equality before the law? The time was 
coming when such a service had to be 
rendered or the Temple would be split 
from top to bottom. 

When a great personage is needed, 
Providence, it seems, supplies the need. 
Out in Illinois was a man not disobedient 
to his spiritual vision, obeying his "psy- 
chological moment" to the very letter. He 
was telling a big man by the name of 
Douglas, and the people of his state and 
the people of the whole nation, that "a 
house divided against itself cannot stand ; 
a nation half slave and half free cannot 
endure." 



68 Great Americans 

These were divine truths. The people 
of his state listened. The nation listened. 
He was made President of the United 
States. He put an end to a four years' 
war. He put an end to slavery. He be- 
came the greatest man in the nation. He 
was honored by the whole world. Count- 
less multitudes bowed their heads and 
wept when informed that he was dead. 
His portrait illumines the stateliest as 
well as the humblest of homes. It deco- 
rates every art gallery in America. It 
hangs with that of Washington in the 
leading galleries of Europe. His name is 
an inspiration to the old and to the young, 
to every aspiring youth, to every down- 
trodden soul; an encouragement to the 
poor, the humble ; a check upon the proud, 
the haughty ; a prophecy and fulfillment of 
what a man may become when his boy- 
hood is ennobled with work and a desire 
to improve and become useful and great, 
and in his maturity he continues to strive 
after his ideals with perseverance to the 
end. 

What name in the Temple of Fame is 



Abraham Lincoln 69 

the highest of all? Is it not the name of 
Abraham Lincoln? 



We deem it a fitting close to these "Psy- 
chological Moments" to quote the beauti- 
ful tribute paid to the great Emancipator, 
of whom it might be said, as Jonson said 
of Shakespeare: 

**He was not of an age, but for all time." 

by the late Henry W. Grady, a brilliant 
son of Georgia, a peerless orator and edi- 
tor, the idol of his state, the pride of the 
nation, a splendid example of the genius 
and aspirations of his people, a noble wit- 
ness of the grandeur of the achievements 
of the American statesman, and of the 
American soldier, rejoicing in his citizen- 
ship in an indissoluble Union of inde- 
structible States, at the annual dinner of 
the New England Society, held in New 
York City on the evening of December 
12, 1886 — his truly "psychological mo- 



70 Great Americans 

menf' — when he spoke, in part, as fol- 
lows: 

"Let me tell you that the typical 
American has already come. Great 
types, like valuable plants, are slow to 
flower and fruit. But from the union 
of these Colonies, Puritans and Cava- 
liers, from the straightening of their 
purposes and the crossing of their 
blood, slow perfecting through a cen- 
tury, came he who stands as the first 
typical American, the first who com- 
prehended within himself all the 
strength and gentleness, all the majesty 
and grace of this Republic : — Abraham 
Lincoln. He was the sum of Puritan 
and Cavalier, for in his ardent nature 
were found the virtues of both, and in 
the depths of his great soul the faults 
of both were lost. He was greater than 
Puritan, greater than Cavalier, in that 
he was American, and that in his honest 
form were first gathered the vast and 
thrilling forces of his ideal government, 
charging it with such tremendous mean- 



Henry W. Grady 71 

ing, and so elevating it above human 
suffering, that martyrdom, though in- 
famously aimed, came as a fitting crown 
to a life consecrated from the cradle to 
human liberty. Let us, each cherishing 
the traditions and honoring his fathers, 
build with reverent hands to the type 
of this simple but sublime life, and in 
our common glory as Americans there 
will be plenty and to spare for your 
forefathers and for mine." 

Three years later Henry W. Grady, at 
the age of thirty-eight, was himself num- 
bered among the illustrious dead. 



